Heritage and vitality: whether the Rule in Antony Gibbs is a presumption

The Rule in Antony Gibbs provides that if the proper law of a contract is Australian, then a discharge of the debt by a foreign jurisdiction will not be a discharge in Australia unless the creditor submitted to the foreign jurisdiction. This article, first, argues that the Rule is a rebuttable Presumption. Second, the article defends the Rule. The Rule has been criticised by insolvency practitioners as being irreconcilable with modified universalism. But its net effect is not always appreciated. Even if the foreign discharge of debt is not recognised in Australia, comity means local and international creditors will be treated equally when it comes to enforcement. The consequence is a reasonably robust system.